Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: The palatal sham :) (Re: [tied] Re: Albanian (1))

Expand Messages
  • enlil@glenhypermedia.com
    ... Well, I was thinking c.6000-5000 BCE, so I guess we re on the same wavelength. However, you mentioned East Semitic and I m not understanding how that
    Message 1 of 285 , Feb 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Miguel:
      >>If so, then how does that make sense for a prehistoric Semitic loan? How
      >>old do you think Proto-Semitic is?
      >
      > I have no idea. I suspect somewhat older than PIE.

      Well, I was thinking c.6000-5000 BCE, so I guess we're on the same
      wavelength. However, you mentioned East Semitic and I'm not understanding
      how that works. I would have thought that East Semitic wasn't so far east
      back in Neolithic. Unless you're saying that it was more north at the
      time, say, in Western Anatolia... :)


      = gLeN
    • enlil@glenhypermedia.com
      ... In defense of Bomhard, I still think did a better job than anything else I ve come across from the older works of IS or Dolg. I don t expect him to find
      Message 285 of 285 , Feb 29, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Torsten:
        > Another thing about Bomhard: how come there are no context-sensitive
        > palatalisations in his rules over several millenia, when Slavic alone
        > had three or four?

        In defense of Bomhard, I still think did a better job than
        anything else I've come across from the older works of IS or
        Dolg.

        I don't expect him to find all the rules at once but I do
        think that proper analysis of each individual language family
        is lacking in Nostratic. It's a large task to get very
        familiar and educated on more than one proto-language afterall.
        There's just so much to read. I'm still learning about crazy
        things in IE that throw me for a theoretical loop.


        > BTW Holger Pedersen has the same idea of breaking up all PIE
        > consonant clusters in a short remark about future trends (using
        > <deus> and <divus>, supposedly from *däjäwä-) in his History of
        > Linguistics in the 19th century. Cuny uses it too. (Written as
        > remembered!)

        But not for IE where *deiwo- or *dyeu- is reconstructed. These
        syllabics can only be reconstructed into a pre-IE stage.


        = gLeN
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.